I'm Roger Sanchez
Published on June 16, 2004 By Roger Sanchez In Politics
The PMs off to Brussels this week for talks on the EU constitution something which hes unlikely to win in. The French and the Germans have already accused him of Salami tactics that is chopping away at the treaty slice by slice untill theres nothing left. The general view off other countries seems to be that theres no point giving him what he wants because theres no way the British people will approve of it anyway. However there gonna have to give him something or else he won't sign it.

The PM keeps on going on about how its just a tiding up exercise and is necessary fo the enlarged EU. This is crap. It gives loads more power to Brussels and says barely anything about the expansion as far as I can assertain (though I am only 1/3rd of the way through). It was originally a Franco/German model for much furthur intergration but has been watered down quite a lot now. What worries me most is not the new powers it gives but the potential it gives. As a constitution its is I suppose supreme law and it is open to interpretation on some very worrying areas. And once its signed theres no telling how it might be used.

For example Tony says that the new president will take opinions from all the members states and act in all their best interests. But what if he just goes off and does his own thing. Or if he just obeys the dominant Franco/German alliance.

Also whilst member countries retain their veto over foriegn policy full soverignty for foriegn policy is handed over to the EU. I know this seems a bit oxymoronic but thats what it says.
However it hardly likely that with this veto that we'll kepp full control of our foriegn policy. After all how pissed off our the other 24 gonna be if they all wanna do something and we wont let them. Tony is bound to bow to the pressure.

However the Treaty does give some power back to Brussels heres something the PMOS (Primeministers Official Spokesman) said earlier today:

"it would meant that, for the first time, national Parliaments would be able to have a direct input into EU legislation "
Thats says it all about the EU.

on Jun 16, 2004
Your link is broke.

It seems to me that several European Countries do not want to give up their sovereignty, and that is the logical conclusion of increased European integration.

Maybe France, Germany and friends should just go ahead and form their own country. They could call it the Unholy Roman Empire.

on Jun 17, 2004
Madine I`m going to assume that you are an american because of your ignorance on this subject. So I'll give you a few pointers. Yes a lot of European countries do want to band together in a new country called "Europe". Yes these countries include France and Germany the other smaller states like the Benelux countries Ireland and to varying degrees Italy and Spain. Countries opposed to to much intergreation include The new eastern states Poland, Latvia and suchlike, Sacndinavian countries and Britain. Britain's people are deeply opposed because they see no need for it and want to be governed by themselves. However our leaders have not always been so good at defending our soveriegnty.
on Jun 17, 2004
Yes I'm an American.

I didn't know that the Scandinavian countries were against integration.

The idea of a "unified" foreign policy with every member having veto power looks like a recipe for disaster. It would be like the UN, but worse. I can't imagine any sort of coherent foreign policy coming out of such an arrangement.

Do you think it would be viable at all though for the most adamanty pro-integration countries to unify on their own?
on Jun 19, 2004
Yes its completely viable for them to unify on their own. I mean whats easier a few countries who want to unify organising it themselves. Most likely France, Germany and the Benelux countries. Or the Unification of 25 countries of which about half oppose?

As for the foriegn policy thing its likely that the EU countries will only cooperate on silly unimportant issues like aid (which they already do) not on big issues like sending troops (i hope anyway)
on Jun 23, 2004
since when does Ireland want closer integration with Europe? It doesn't. Please be careful with throwing around such false facts. Your definiteion of integration should also be better explained. It's not political integratino that they want, but closer economic, military and legislative integration.

You also seem to be falling into the common problem of assuming that statements like 'full soveign power' means soveignty over UK and other countries. It Doesn't. It is clearly stated that the EU only have soveignty over that which is given to it. So for example, if an EU army was formed, then the EU has full soveign power over it's actions. Or if land was ceded by another country to the EU they it would have full soveign power over that land. The current constitution clearly states that on foreign policy the EU can only speak on issues that all members are agreed upon. But it does have full soveign power to speak on those agree upon issues.

You are having a similar problem with the constitution. Consider it a constitution for another country, that applies to you only in the areas which you have granted it the right to do so. So for example, tax law is outside the EU's remit and therefore the EU constitution has no say on this. Employment law is however inside the EU remit and thus the constitution gaurentees you basic employment rights. I for one am very happy with the 48 hour rule and thank the EU every week for ensuring I spend time at home.

Do please highlight any particular issues you have with the constitution as I would love to hear your opinion on them.